Good, now do away with other forms of censorship.
Spam Blocking = you can't say X more than Y (>> 1) times
While technically censorship, there is a big difference, I think. Obviously in practice spam blocking could maliciously or accidentally be used for censorship.
My belief is that illegal speech is also still a form of censorship, just one that we are OK with. And that spam is more like a denial of service attack. Blocking spam is not about blocking the expression of an idea, but making sure that a communication channel is not abused as to make the channel ineffective.
'Remove all censorship' means not just 'free speech I want other people to have to deal with regardless of context' but also 'free speech that annoys the fuck out of me regardless of context', which very much includes spam.
By 'any conditions you place on it are arbitrary' I am referring specifically to 'if y is greater than x then spam else not spam'. That is arbitrary; you made that up. There is no 'if repeated more than once' appended to the end of "to suppress or delete as objectionable" in merriam webster under 'censor'. If you make up a rule to suite your convenience it is arbitrary.
Read the first sentence again of my last post. I am responding to a sentiment, not to you individually.
I only dislike censorship when they don't ask me first.